The Heights Information & Developments

[HeightsGuy]

I am a local developer with contracts on 3 lots, for a total of 52,650sf, all on 14th St, and possibly an additional 22,000sf along Turkey Gully. We are in the due diligence process reviewing restrictions, and are looking for the best layout for our tracts. As this pocket of the Heights area is most definitely the most desirable, and downright inviting, I want to build within the existing look and feel of the immediate area.

My purpose in this post is to get everyones ideas and feelings on our projects in order to keep the neighborhood the way it is. Yes, I am a developer and my job requires maximizing use of land, but there are ways to go about that without destroying the street, and hopefully pleasing everyone around us.

I have yet to obtain a copy of the deed restrictions, but am fairly sure I am not going to be able to place our typical courtyard style project within these boundaries. If so, I personally do not think it flows with the rest of the street. K Hovnanian is a national builder that recently purchased Brighton Homes & Parkside Homes for an obscene amount of cash. They aren't worried about the neighbors, or the whole area for that matter. Turntime & margins are their only concern.

I plan on designing a Hill Country style traditional 3 story (sorry y'all) 1900-2100sf finished in stucco, TX stone, and some hardie wrapped around the back.

Please voice your concerns or ideas, as they are all appreciated.

I can be reached directly at jordan@smithterra.com

I know you have an obligation to maximize use, but as you can see from the current development by Lindsey and the group across the street (unless you are one of them), the area can sell $500k homes, so, first off, please build less but larger free-standing homes, each with street frontage. In Shady Acres we are starting to see 6 homes to a property, three attached on each side with a common driveway down the middle. They look like glorified apartments. I think you can make more for the money by doing what Lindsey is doing, and I think the market will be there if you build it. Second, as was stated before, please leave as many trees as you possibly can. Look at the row of new homes on the southside of 14th in the 2000 block. All big, all expensive, but deviod of trees. Without the trees the differing setbacks stand out like a sore thumb. I think it's become the ugliest stretch in the area. On a similar note, if the corner of 14th and Beall is one of yours, please, for the love of all that is good, leave that tree alone. Make that someone's side/back yard and replat the site to face Beall instead of 14th.

I'm not a big fan of the hill country style, especially in the Heights, but a hallmark of the Heights is the smorgasboard of styles, so do what you think the market will bear in that regard. I personally would rather see more of what Lindsey is doing. Also, look at the house on the north side of 14th on the gulley, not the tin house but the other newer one. I think it's a beauty, and it fits the hood better than a stone house would. Whatever you do however, if you're going to build a $500k stone & stucco, keep the hardiplank out of the equation. A "half-and-half" house with one style in the front and hardiplank on the sides and back cheapens it IMO. That is one of the reasons faux-victorians are popular with builders. You can hardiplank the whole thing and it looks good. The detail comes from the lines of the house, not the material. I'm sure you're not afraid of a framing square, are you?

[mary]

I am a local developer with contracts on 3 lots, for a total of 52,650sf, all on 14th St, and possibly an additional 22,000sf along Turkey Gully. We are in the due diligence process reviewing restrictions, and are looking for the best layout for our tracts. As this pocket of the Heights area is most definitely the most desirable, and downright inviting, I want to build within the existing look and feel of the immediate area.

My purpose in this post is to get everyones ideas and feelings on our projects in order to keep the neighborhood the way it is. Yes, I am a developer and my job requires maximizing use of land, but there are ways to go about that without destroying the street, and hopefully pleasing everyone around us.

Please voice your concerns or ideas, as they are all appreciated.

I can be reached directly at jordan@smithterra.com

Mr. Smith:

I appreciate your concern about maintaining the character of our neighborhood. I have e-mailed you directly so that we can begin that communication. Just FYI the "gully' will soon be knwon offcially has Night Heron Creek.

This neighborhood has graciously sized lots with street facing homes and mostly detached garages. The orginal homes were built by working class people in the late 1940's - early 1950's. There are still some orginal homeowners in our neighborhhod. My husband and I have been here just since 1999. We bought here because it felt like "country" in the city. We bought our house from the orignal owners who had lived since 1949.

Most of the houses built by developers since Tropical Storm Allison devastated our neighborhood are non-descript "fake" stucco boxes. The houses take up an inordinate amount of the the now tiny subdivided lots. Some house were so poorly planned that trash containers cannot go though side gates, so many are left out front. These houses are also built much closer to the street than existing houses. Many trees have been lost in the process. Because of the increased density we are beginning to have probelms with parking on the street.

I'm grateful that you seem to be open to communicating with the people who already live here. I look forward to hearing from you.

Mary

[HeightsGuy]

Wow, driving around this past weekend, I saw that the old trailer park that started at 15th and Beall next to the Czech Lodge and wrapped around in an L-shape to W 15 1/2 st has been clear cut to the ground. There must have been a hundred trees back there, all gone now. I think there is about 5+ acres back there, does anyone know who the friendly developer is that chopped down every last bit of green that was on the property? Does anyone know what is going in there?

[Moose]

The Shady Acres Civic Club newsletter notes this development.

The President of the Club writes, "The name of the developer is unclear at this point, but the developer's intentions are not. The recent replat submittal to the Planning Commission indicates that 123 new units will be constructed on the site." (emphasis added).

123 new units? I have trouble picturing that many units on that piece of land. And living just around the corner on 16th, I also can't imagine that amount of traffic in the area and the limited points of entry and exit. I do imagine that to sustain that density in that area they will petition the city to extend 15 1/2 street through to Bevis.

[Guest danax]

Obviously the developer is planning on making a fortune and the trees were just taking up valuable space and too much of a hassle to contruct with them in the way. Of course, they do the same thing in the suburbs so this person is not unique, just that inner-loopers are perhaps more sensitive to it.

I suppose the loss of trees and trailers is just part of the transition to density. Trees will be planted by the new residents and will eventually create a livable streetscape once again. We're becoming more and more like New York each day. The townhome boom is driving the townhomes to the edges of the lots and sidewalks that will one create a huge "brownstone" village. The same laments about tree loss were probably voiced 100 years ago in NY.

[HeightsGuy]

123 units? Are you kidding me? Just rough numbers, but if they have 250,000 square feet, 123 units gives each unit about 2000 square feet of land. I suppose it can be done, but gawd, who's gonna want to live in the middle of that thing.

Anyway, did a little digging, and HCAD records show the owner of the property with the same address as these guys:

McGuyer Homebuilders

In the site they show 4 lines of homes, I think the most likely of which would be Carmel Builders.

[heights_yankee]

Obviously the developer is planning on making a fortune and the trees were just taking up valuable space and too much of a hassle to contruct with them in the way. Of course, they do the same thing in the suburbs so this person is not unique, just that inner-loopers are perhaps more sensitive to it.

I suppose the loss of trees and trailers is just part of the transition to density. Trees will be planted by the new residents and will eventually create a livable streetscape once again. We're becoming more and more like New York each day. The townhome boom is driving the townhomes to the edges of the lots and sidewalks that will one create a huge "brownstone" village. The same laments about tree loss were probably voiced 100 years ago in NY.

I think there are areas of town that are starting to resemble NYC and, so long as they keep the townhouses together, they look ok. I think the major difference is the brownstones of the northeast are solidly built- stone and brick. Most of what these developers are throwing up in Houston are hardiplank...

[heightsfan]

So is this confirmed this building will be an Art Studio or Gallery ? I noticed work being done there ?

Also what are they going to build behind SomeBurger ?

[jscarbor]

Stone and brick has nothing to do with how solid a home is, it merely a facade. Now if you want to talk about the asthetics, thats another story.

Also, I think the minimum lot size is 1600 maybe 1700 feet. So, 2000 feet is not bad in the sense? That being said it will resemble a concrete village for the foreseable future.

Edited November 27, 2006 by jscarbor

[editor]

Stone and brick has nothing to do with how solid a home is, it merely a facade.

Not always true. You can have a home actually built with stone or brick, and the result is a tremendously stable and energy efficient home. I grew up in a brick home. But they are very rare in Houston. People have spent so many years cutting to many corners I wonder if any of the builders in the area even know how to do it anymore.

[jscarbor]

Not always true. You can have a home actually built with stone or brick, and the result is a tremendously stable and energy efficient home. I grew up in a brick home. But they are very rare in Houston. People have spent so many years cutting to many corners I wonder if any of the builders in the area even know how to do it anymore.

I guess I haven't seen any homes built with brick or stone as the structural part of the house? I have seen block construction but not brick or stone? Also, the air gap between the brick and the sheathing is important in order to help breath the home among other things.

[heights_yankee]

I guess I haven't seen any homes built with brick or stone as the structural part of the house? I have seen block construction but not brick or stone? Also, the air gap between the brick and the sheathing is important in order to help breath the home among other things.

The types of homes I was referring to are anywhere from 100-200 years old.

[TheNiche]

The types of homes I was referring to are anywhere from 100-200 years old.

You think there might be a reason they don't make them like that anymore?

[heights_yankee]

You think there might be a reason they don't make them like that anymore?

I'm sure there are myraid reasons and they all have to do with cost, not quality.

[HeightsGuy]

You think there might be a reason they don't make them like that anymore?

I think the biggest reasons are apathy and disposable culture. Hardly anyone expects to buy a house for life anymore, so no one cares if the quailty is there. People just want the lipstick and granite countertops, if it all falls apart in 20 years who cares because they'll be gone in 5.

[PureAuteur]

It's precisely the disposable culture and apathy that ruins our national landscape. You just keep building more and more stuff that quickly goes bad and creates a demand for more stuff. Most of the homes they build now days are like cheap apartments. Most of the new neighborhoods don't even deserve to be called neighborhoods. They are so poorly designed and landscaped. I think the mid 90s was the end of the long-term planning era in America with well designed, well landscaped neighborhoods with well-being, quality homes. You would think the Heights would be insulated from the disgraceful development habits of the last 10 years, seen mainly in the suburbs, but now with the sudden inner loop housing boom, it's getting some of the cheap tree-clearing stuff too. It's a shame that more independent custom builders don't come in and make inspired Victorian designs instead of these computer designed homes. The custom homes are even selling for more right now. My uncle's home which he designed and built himself on E. 8 1/2 just resold for twice the amount it sold for in the late 90s.

[jscarbor]

Homes today are really, or at the very least, should be built to last for about 100 years. Even original Heights homes were built to last only a 100 years or so. In fact they were built without thought for airconditioning thats why I think they have so many damn doors. So, why is the Hieghts home, many of which have outlasted their intended purpose, so revered? There are a lot of homes being built in the Heights now that are much better than what was built 80 years ago. Yes some suck but so did some of them in 1928.

[TheNiche]

I'm sure there are myraid reasons and they all have to do with cost, not quality.

The price of a home is equal to the present value of its utility in monetary units relative to other goods and investments available to the consumer. Therefore, if a developer spends an additional $30,000 on a home to extend its useful life from 50 years to 100 years, and the market rental rate is $1,500 per month, then the PV of each of those $1,500 payments net of expenses must exceed the additional costs incurred during construction.

This simplfied model can be tweaked for a more accurate result depending upon a number of variables, but provides a simple framework for the decision-making process.

Homes today are really, or at the very least, should be built to last for about 100 years. Even original Heights homes were built to last only a 100 years or so. In fact they were built without thought for airconditioning thats why I think they have so many damn doors. So, why is the Hieghts home, many of which have outlasted their intended purpose, so revered? There are a lot of homes being built in the Heights now that are much better than what was built 80 years ago. Yes some suck but so did some of them in 1928.

Good post, and excellent perspective. It is easy to forget that people in the past had absolutely no idea of the technological changes that were in store for their buildings or for society. They built for the times in which they lived, just as we are today. Yes, that produces a high probability of functional obsolesence, but it isn't easily avoidable.

[segovia]

Anyone know the status on this project? Initially, I thought the building was going to be torn down...making way for new construction. I noticed this morning...a quick, cheap paint job on the exterior walls and new steel, green doors installed. Before the change, it used to house a large majority of day labor workers that congregated in the Blockbuster parking lot.

[rps324]

Probably what you see is what you are going to get.... :closedeyes:

[heightsfan]

Good Afternoon,

hope your day goes well !

Does anyone have any ideas what is being built in that lot that is being torn down?

retail ? town homes ? cleaners ? bank ?

[Heights2Bastrop]

Is this the location where Heights Tackle Shop used to be?

[Markus]

ahhh, the lot across from Sunny's/and Pizza Inn(hut).

SW corner of the intersection.

[Heights2Bastrop]

Yeah, that

[west20th]

Not sorry to see that building go. No signs or any indication of what is going their just yet.

[heightsfan]

Good Afternoon All,

Would it make a good restaurant location ?

Also what came about of Waldos Coffee on Heights Blvd ?

[Heights2Bastrop]

Restaurants, for the most part, are a tough go in the Heights since they can

[jd77008]

The property was purchased by a custom home builder not known for townhomes so I would guess we will see a law office or real estate office much like the others along Heights Blvd.

[cottonmather0]

What I don't understand is why people are willing to pay $350,000 for these tiny little shoeboxes in the Heights and Rice Mil when you can buy a bigger house on a bigger lot in Timbergrove or Lazybrook for less money. If granite countertops and recessed lighting is that big a deal, you can get a lot for $100,000 and 3 months of remodeling of a well contructed older house, plus you still get a yard, trees, and parking that doesn't require precision 4 point turns.

[sunsets]

I would venture to say that the "shiny new" effect charms a lot of the buyers.

And what is "$100,000 and 3 months of remodeling" to you might be an absolute nightmare for someone else. (I, personally, do not have a lot of tolerance for huge renovation projects while I'm in the house) Plus, a lot of buyers don't have the imagination to see through ugly interior decorating and think about what a house COULD be.

And finally, I think a lot of buyers in the Heights/RM have absolutely no idea that neighborhoods like Lazybrook and Timbergrove, and even Garden Oaks exist. My husband was astounded the first time we drove through Timbergrove ("what a nice place!"), and he'd been living right next door in the Heights for 9 months prior.